3 ms·
I am a little frustrated over an apparent lack of curiosity around mask effectiveness. * If you think they're an effective measure for the public in general (w
by actuallyalys 3y ago
I am a little frustrated over an apparent lack of curiosity around mask effectiveness.
* If you think they're an effective measure for the public in general (which is probably closest to my position), then the variation in studies seems like it should still give you pause because it seems like the way mandates and messaging are implemented could undermine the usefulness.
* If you think they're effective in individual cases when people do it diligently, it still seems like you should be worried about the possibility that a lot of people who think they're diligently and correctly masking aren't, including some medical professionals who are regularly exposed to the disease.
* Honestly, even if you don't think they work at all, it still seems like learning why masks don't work would expand our knowledge of the disease.
Of course, we do know about plenty of factors that undermine mask effectiveness: people avoiding them altogether, people wearing ones that don't fit, people not covering their nose, etc. And of course researchers can skew the results with their methodological choices. But there seems to be enough variability in these studies that unknown or underappreciated factors could be significant.
- dataangel 3y agowhat variability? AFAIK in controlled studies masks work (as in when you actually test things in a lab rather than looking at population statistics), are more effective when both people in the room are wearing them, we know the size of particle they filter and we know the viruses are bigger than that. there's 0 doubt at this point they do what they are supposed to do.
- actuallyalys 3y agoI'm talking about variability in the studies on population-wide masking. The consistency in lab studies is a major part of why I belive masking is an effective public health measure but would like more study on what's causing the variation in ecological studies.
- Izkata 3y ago> we know the size of particle they filter and we know the viruses are bigger than that. If we're talking cloth masks as most people are, the viruses are actually way smaller.
- sangnoir 3y agoDo viruses float freely in the air, or are they mostly in aerosolized bodily fluids when from an infected persons coughs and sneezes? Cloth masks are great at trapping those and greatly reducing the "muzzle velocity" of droplets that do escape.
- Libcat99 3y agoDuring mid covid I did a demo for my kids. A sheet of paper and a spray bottle. Test 1, spray from 2 feet. Of course the paper was soaked. Test 2, a cloth mask placed on the paper. It gets damp, especially if left in place. Test 3, a cloth mask over the spray bottle. The mask blocks almost all of the spray. We did not bother with test 4 (2 masks) after the 3rd, but I think they understood the point. We did retry 3 with a medical mask, with 0 spray through.
- ezekiel68 3y agoYes, this is the key insight. The mere fact that the virons are smaller than holes in the mask means nothing. The virons aren't expelled from our mouths or noses on their own, but are attached to moisture droplets which _are_ effectively trapped by surgical (and better) masks.